MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163024015

Métis Student Self-Identification in Ontario's K-12 Schools: Education Policy and Parents, Families, and Communities.

2014· article· en· W2163024015 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Jonathan Anuik, Laura-Lee Bellehumeur-Kearns

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetisIdentification (biology)MandateSociologyPolitical sciencePublic relationsPedagogyLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mandate for school boards to develop self-identification policies for First Nation, Metis, and Inuit students is part of the 2007 Ministry of Education’s Ontario First Nation, Metis and Inuit Education Policy Framework . In this paper, we share findings from a larger study on the Framework that examines Metis student self-identification processes and assesses barriers, challenges, opportunities, and best practices. We draw on themes from a literature review concerning Metis education and we examine data from an online survey and key interviews with school administrators responsible for initiatives to support Metis students ’ self-identification. The survey and interviews took place in the winter of 2011. We find that, for the self-identification policy to be effective, teachers, administrators, and support staff (clerks, receptionists, secretaries, and teaching/educational assistants) must build a school climate that welcomes Metis learners and parents, families, and communities and affirms their historical and contemporary values in practice. This way, students and their families may feel comfortable to identify as Metis.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.568
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.311 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Educational Administration and PolicySame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207